To the Editor:
Since Friday, there's been a lot of talk on campus about the SAE drug incident, and so I wanted to take a minute to address some of the more misguided assertions I've been hearing ("Harassment Allegedly Followed Drug Report," May 21). First, the issue shouldn't be whether those charged (if convicted) deserve punishment. Regardless of whether you support our current drug laws, the fact is that the individuals in question were allegedly caught breaking them, both knowingly and willingly.
Second, we shouldn't be putting fraternity bonds on some kind of pedestal, such that individuals are allowed to turn a completely blind eye to the actions of their brothers if you see something, say something, especially if someone you know is jeopardizing the safety of another.
That said, I think we can still question whether Philip Aubart 10 did the best thing when he called Safety and Security, thereby creating the mess we're currently witnessing. Assuming the drug use of his brothers truly made him uncomfortable, I don't see why he couldn't have contacted a College administrator, instead of immediately defaulting to the local enforcement. If the issue had been dealt with internally, the problematic behavior could still have been brought to an end, all without leading to such extensive and publicly visible repercussions.
There's a difference, after all, between desert and obligation even if those charged deserve what they ultimately get, it doesn't follow that Aubart was obligated to ensure that their consequences be maximized.
